Monroe Chamber of Commerce Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
720263750
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Monroe, LA, USA
Phone
3188074015
Rating
66
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,056,674
Expenses
$1,053,538
Assets
$742,909
Liabilities
$514,098

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

41 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ROY HEATHERLY (President & CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • ROY HEATHERLY (President & CEO): $124,500 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To advance and protect the general welfare and prosperity of ouachita parish and the surrounding areas so that the business community and its citizens shall prosper. All appropriate and necessary means of promotion shall be provided and particular attention shall be given to the economic, financial, commerical, agricultural, industrial, governmental, educational and civic activities of the region.

What it reported doing in 2024

Government relations/affairs division - focused on state, local and federal government initiatives. The chamber had two registered state lobbyist on staff. These individuals were in baton rouge during legislative sessions as needed. They also conducted an annual northern exposure advocacy trip to the state capital. On the local point, the chamber had an agreement with the city of monroe to represent the city in the areas of economic development, state and federal advocacy and transportation and infastructure. The chamber also conducted one trip to Washington, d.c. To meet with house and senate members as well as various federal agencies to promote issues of concern for our area.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 91% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 49
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 78
  • Sustainability: 32
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 54.6%; rating input score 55
  • Program expense ratio: 54.2%; rating input score 54
  • Fundraising efficiency: $0.39 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: No; rating input score 0

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 97.6%; rating input score 98; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 0.3%; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.71; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.69; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 11.8%; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 46.2% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.1% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 9.3% per year; rating input score 100; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 54.6% of revenue deployed · 54.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 40 of 41 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $571K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $124K · 41 people listed
  • Consistency: 28 of 29 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and related organizations
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.
  • People: Everyone the filings name, and which of them the filings identify by more than a name.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 55/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 54/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 2/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Related-party transparency scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 37/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 32/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 11/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 31/100.